Police Misconduct Catch All Thread

[laughing dog]

You're trying to confuse the situation by bringing up irrelevant meanings.

Naw, that’s your MO. (See below).

Drawing a gun in an inappropriate situations is acting in a threatening manner. Typically it's enough for a brandishing a firearm charge.

You are bringing up irrelevant meanings. The only person in that situation who was in danger was Tamir Rice from two trigger happy cowards.

 

[TSwizzle]

ffs, who shoots a pregnant woman?

A pregnant woman is just as capable of running you over as a non-pregnant one. Also, cops had no way of knowing she was pregnant, even if that did matter to her threat level.
This shoplifter, btw, has a 6 year old while being only 21 years old. So she has a long history of making brilliant life choices.

Shocking bodycam footage reveals the moment a pregnant black woman was shot dead by police after she drove into an officer in a Kroger parking lot.

Emphasis changed to the more relevant section. Her race doesn't matter. Her reproductive status (G3 P2) doesn't matter. What matters is what she did after she shoplifted and refused to exit her vehicle. That is, she used her vehicle as a deadly weapon.

The dumbass cop stood at the front of her car and why the hell did he have his weapon out anyway? She stole a $20 bottle of vodka or something.

 

[Toni]

And you know those pregnancies were a choice because…?

I have seen no reason to speculate that they weren't.

She was 15 and legally unable to consent.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're trying to confuse the situation by bringing up irrelevant meanings.

Naw, that’s your MO. (See below).

Drawing a gun in an inappropriate situations is acting in a threatening manner. Typically it's enough for a brandishing a firearm charge.

You are bringing up irrelevant meanings. The only person in that situation who was in danger was Tamir Rice from two trigger happy cowards.

All you are proving is that you won't actually address the point.

Tamir Rice's actions appeared to be a serious threat. Yes, the weapon was not real but weapons are always assumed real until proven otherwise. You are expecting the cops to act on knowledge they didn't have.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

ffs, who shoots a pregnant woman?

A pregnant woman is just as capable of running you over as a non-pregnant one. Also, cops had no way of knowing she was pregnant, even if that did matter to her threat level.
This shoplifter, btw, has a 6 year old while being only 21 years old. So she has a long history of making brilliant life choices.

Shocking bodycam footage reveals the moment a pregnant black woman was shot dead by police after she drove into an officer in a Kroger parking lot.

Emphasis changed to the more relevant section. Her race doesn't matter. Her reproductive status (G3 P2) doesn't matter. What matters is what she did after she shoplifted and refused to exit her vehicle. That is, she used her vehicle as a deadly weapon.

The dumbass cop stood at the front of her car and why the hell did he have his weapon out anyway? She stole a $20 bottle of vodka or something.

I'm going to guess he drew it when she started the car. Starting the car turns it from a hunk of metal to a deadly threat.

 

[laughing dog]

You're trying to confuse the situation by bringing up irrelevant meanings.

Naw, that’s your MO. (See below).

Drawing a gun in an inappropriate situations is acting in a threatening manner. Typically it's enough for a brandishing a firearm charge.

You are bringing up irrelevant meanings. The only person in that situation who was in danger was Tamir Rice from two trigger happy cowards.

All you are proving is that you won't actually address the point.

Accurate descriptions is a point. You have been misrepresenting what happened.

Tamir Rice's actions appeared to be a serious threat. Yes, the weapon was not real but weapons are always assumed real until proven otherwise. You are expecting the cops to act on knowledge they didn't have.

No, I expect the police to not act like trigger happy cowards. These two gunslingers shouted to him to drop his weapon and then opened fire without giving him time to drop it,

 

[bilby]

weapons are always assumed real until proven otherwise

Is this law of nature of the "for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction" kind, or more the "nature abhors a vacuum" kind?

How about this one:

Starting the car turns it from a hunk of metal to a deadly threat.

Where, just out of curiosity, do you get this shit from anyway?? Your world seems to be ensnared in a network of unquestionable axioms, that only you are aware of.

 

[blastula]

You can see she was turning the wheel so she didn't run into the cop. The cop could see that too.

 

[Toni]

The officer was standing up against it when it was still.

Doesn't mean the car was not accelerating at a rate that can't be dismissed as "barely moving".

“Still” means it wasn’t accelerating.

You're trying to confuse the situation by bringing up irrelevant meanings.

He was in front of the car blocking her in. Still. Then she steps on the gas and he steps on the trigger.

Yes, the two officers believed it was a real weapon because they didn’t bother to take the time to find out or to even let him act in a threatening manner. But their mistaken belief that Rice had a real firearm does not make that a toy a real fire arm.

Drawing a gun in an inappropriate situations is acting in a threatening manner. Typically it's enough for a brandishing a firearm charge.

Locally, misdemeanor with up to 6 months in jail.

Tamir Right ce did not ‘draw’ a weapon, even a toy one.

I watched the video. Multiple times.

Did you?

No one steps on a trigger.

The officer could have stepped aside rather than shooting someone over a vague accusation of shoplifting. But that would mean that a human life was worth more than an accusation of petty theft. I realize that’s not how your brain works. For you, police are always right. Even Derec can occasionally admit a police officer is wrong.

 

[lpetrich]

There is a problem with shooting someone who is driving a car. The car may keep moving and may end up hitting someone or something. Is that something that one should be willing to risk?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're trying to confuse the situation by bringing up irrelevant meanings.

Naw, that’s your MO. (See below).

Drawing a gun in an inappropriate situations is acting in a threatening manner. Typically it's enough for a brandishing a firearm charge.

You are bringing up irrelevant meanings. The only person in that situation who was in danger was Tamir Rice from two trigger happy cowards.

All you are proving is that you won't actually address the point.

Accurate descriptions is a point. You have been misrepresenting what happened.

Tamir Rice's actions appeared to be a serious threat. Yes, the weapon was not real but weapons are always assumed real until proven otherwise. You are expecting the cops to act on knowledge they didn't have.

No, I expect the police to not act like trigger happy cowards. These two gunslingers shouted to him to drop his weapon and then opened fire without giving him time to drop it,

You are in effect saying that cops are supposed to be able to at a glance tell the difference between someone pulling out a realistic replica and someone pulling out a real gun. Sorry, many of them are hard to tell apart side by side in good light.

If it's fake and they shoot you blame them. If it's real and they don't shoot they die. This isn't fantasyland where you're guaranteed a good outcome if you try hard enough.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The officer could have stepped aside rather than shooting someone over a vague accusation of shoplifting. But that would mean that a human life was worth more than an accusation of petty theft. I realize that’s not how your brain works. For you, police are always right. Even Derec can occasionally admit a police officer is wrong.

Monday morning quarterback.

You don't know what she was going to do once she started moving. She had already committed a serious felony, would she turn towards him if he evaded or would she turn away?

 

[bilby]

You are in effect saying that cops are supposed to be able to at a glance tell the difference between someone pulling out a realistic replica and someone pulling out a real gun.

No, he's saying that in neither case should preemptive lethal force be used by police.

American citizens have a constitutional right to have a real gun. Merely producing an object that you are lawfully entitled to carry should not result in your immediate summary execution by police officers.

If a policeman is so terrified by the mere sight of an armed person that they immediately fear for their lives and feel the need to open fire, then policing probably isn't a profession for which they have aptitude. Policing in the USA certainly isn't.

 

[bilby]

Loren, your arguments all boil down to "Police should not be expected to risk their lives, in the protection of citizens lawful rights".

Do you really believe this?

What do you think a police officer's job actually is, if not to defend citizens, even when this entails some degree of risk to themselves?

 

[TomC]

Loren, your arguments all boil down to "Police should not be expected to risk their lives, in the protection of citizens lawful rights".

No they don't.
I understand that an Australian who watches a lot of American media might think that.

But it isn't what he said.
It's as realistic as Barbos.
Tom

 

[bilby]

I understand that an Australian who watches a lot of American media might think that.

I don't watch a lot of American media, but if I did, it really wouldn't be relevant to what I think of Loren's arguments on this discussion board - as far as I am aware, his posts here get essentially no media coverage beyond this board itself, even in the American media.

 

[TomC]

I understand that an Australian who watches a lot of American media might think that.

I don't watch a lot of American media, but if I did, it really wouldn't be relevant to what I think of Loren's arguments on this discussion board - as far as I am aware, his posts here get essentially no media coverage beyond this board itself, even in the American media.

What you posted was:

Loren, your arguments all boil down to "Police should not be expected to risk their lives, in the protection of citizens lawful rights".

No they don't. It's ridiculous to claim that Loren's arguments boil down to that.

Could you explain why you think that they do?
Tom

 

[bilby]

I understand that an Australian who watches a lot of American media might think that.

I don't watch a lot of American media, but if I did, it really wouldn't be relevant to what I think of Loren's arguments on this discussion board - as far as I am aware, his posts here get essentially no media coverage beyond this board itself, even in the American media.

What you posted was:

Loren, your arguments all boil down to "Police should not be expected to risk their lives, in the protection of citizens lawful rights".

No they don't. It's ridiculous to claim that Loren's arguments boil down to that.

Could you explain why you think that they do?
Tom

I read them.

Can you explain why you think that they don't? And why you are so confident in that "thinking" as to describe any other conclusion as ridiculous?

We probably shouldn't open the can of worms of asking why you feel that Loren cannot answer for himself, or why you feel that your uninvited, unwanted, and irrelevant intrusion into a discussion between two other people is appropriate or helpful in any way.

 

[laughing dog]

You're trying to confuse the situation by bringing up irrelevant meanings.

Naw, that’s your MO. (See below).

Drawing a gun in an inappropriate situations is acting in a threatening manner. Typically it's enough for a brandishing a firearm charge.

You are bringing up irrelevant meanings. The only person in that situation who was in danger was Tamir Rice from two trigger happy cowards.

All you are proving is that you won't actually address the point.

Accurate descriptions is a point. You have been misrepresenting what happened.

Tamir Rice's actions appeared to be a serious threat. Yes, the weapon was not real but weapons are always assumed real until proven otherwise. You are expecting the cops to act on knowledge they didn't have.

No, I expect the police to not act like trigger happy cowards. These two gunslingers shouted to him to drop his weapon and then opened fire without giving him time to drop it,

You are in effect saying that cops are supposed to be able to at a glance tell the difference between someone pulling out a realistic replica and someone pulling out a real gun. Sorry, many of them are hard to tell apart side by side in good light.

If it's fake and they shoot you blame them. If it's real and they don't shoot they die. This isn't fantasyland where you're guaranteed a good outcome if you try hard enough.

I don't know if you simply have tunnel vision or if you just actually read the posts to which you respond.

I expect police to refrain from shooting someone until they are under an actual threat. Tamir Rice posed no actual threat EVEN IF HE HAD A REAL FIREARM. He did not "pull it out" nor did he aim it at the police. Those trigger happy cowards jumped out of their vehicle, hid behind it, shouted drop the gun and immediately started firing before any human being could have responded to their command.

Moreover, you presented a false dichotomy. If the police do not immediately open fire, they do not necessarily die. In fact, they do not necessarily even get hit by fire.

Instead of presenting kneejerk apologia for police cowardice, try to take more than a millisecond to form a relevant and cogent response. There is no hurry and you are not in any danger of being harmed at all.

 

[laughing dog]

The officer could have stepped aside rather than shooting someone over a vague accusation of shoplifting. But that would mean that a human life was worth more than an accusation of petty theft. I realize that’s not how your brain works. For you, police are always right. Even Derec can occasionally admit a police officer is wrong.

Monday morning quarterback.

You don't know what she was going to do once she started moving. She had already committed a serious felony, would she turn towards him if he evaded or would she turn away?

Will never know, because that killer who unnecessarily placed himself in harms way by standing in front of the car, opened fire. You act as if this officer was some sort of immobile untrained moron whose only response was to open fire to kill someone.